U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-13-2016, 02:33 PM
 
Location: Canada
5,684 posts, read 6,531,390 times
Reputation: 8183

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Return2FL View Post
Bill Clinton. We can't forget Bill Clinton. The guy whose wife was a candidate to be POTUS and who dirtied up the women who were accusing her husband of sexual assault. How do women view this crooked person as an asset to them?
Bill Clinton is a sexual predator. Do you think Hillary views him as an asset to her? I was under the impression that at best she thought he was as much a liability as an asset.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-13-2016, 02:39 PM
 
2,567 posts, read 1,334,146 times
Reputation: 2826
Quote:
Originally Posted by netwit View Post
Bill Clinton is a sexual predator. Do you think Hillary views him as an asset to her? I was under the impression that at best she thought he was as much a liability as an asset.
When he was under suspicion Hillary publicly dragged his victims through the mud to dirty up their reputations. She's an awful woman.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2016, 02:57 PM
 
Location: Canada
5,684 posts, read 6,531,390 times
Reputation: 8183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Return2FL View Post
When he was under suspicion Hillary publicly dragged his victims through the mud to dirty up their reputations. She's an awful woman.
Yes, she did. I don't like her either but regardless of denying "standing by her man," that's exactly what she did just as many wives do, including blaming the other woman.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2016, 03:26 PM
 
3,153 posts, read 2,069,563 times
Reputation: 1256
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan View Post
Aah nuts, you're at it again!
Rants as usual...from you is all we get...I got used to it....

Quote:
People getting hit by a bus in Canada is of far more likely a scenario but they still manage to cross major intersections without carrying a firearm. Being afraid of a remote possibility to the extent they wish to carry a firearm is not the Canadian way ........yet. You're different. We understand.
Go and talk to this Canadian girl assaulted in her Canadian home....tell here how you feel about your high horse "state of societal failure" if she had a gun to defend herself


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjUzkVrEV1o


Quote:
Can Canadians purchase firearms Saturno and to quote you "yes or no will suffice"?
The fact that you can does not mean it is a right...big difference...maybe second time is a charm....


Quote:
I think you know the difference between an "act" describing the constitution of a country that encompasses a number of documents including the Charter without there being one single document described as "the constitution". Any term referred to as "the constitution of Canada" refers to the structural make up of documents of legislation, a charter describing our rights, a codicil for Aboriginal rights and any number of customs or traditions long held but not necessarily etched in stone. It describes our way of running the country using all of those without laying each one out in detail and making them inviolate. Our charter serves that role and forms a part of the constitution of Canada

constitution definition. A nation or state's fundamental set of laws. Most nations with constitutions have them in written form, such as the United States Constitution. The constitution of Britain, by contrast, is an informal set of traditions, based on several different laws.

to wit: "The Canadian Constitution is composed of written and unwritten statutes, customs, judicial decisions, and tradition. The written part of the Constitution consists of the Constitution Act, 1867, which created a federation and the division of legislative powers between the federal and provincial governments, and the Constitution Act, 1982, which transferred formal control over amendments to the Constitution from Britain to Canada, and added a Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms."

Unnecessary drivel for the point I was making...Canada has a Constitution period....

Quote:
Newsflash: that old meme of Hitler disarming his people using gun control has been long ago debunked
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_gun_control_theory
Really...you may want to read here:

Fact-checking Ben Carson's claim that gun control laws allowed the Nazis to carry out Holocaust | PolitiFact

A snippet:

When they came to power, the Nazis used whatever gun records they had to seize weapons from their enemies, but Ellerbock told us the files included very few of the firearms in circulation.

"In my records, I found many Jews who well into the late 1930s possessed guns," Ellerbock told us.

The Nazis adopted a new gun law in 1938. According to an analysis by Bernard Harcourt, a professor at Columbia University School of Law, it loosened gun ownership rules in several ways.

It deregulated the buying and selling of rifles, shotguns and ammunition. It made handguns easier to own by allowing anyone with a hunting license to buy, sell or carry one at any time. (You didn’t need to be hunting.) It also extended the permit period from one year to three and gave local officials more discretion in letting people under 18 get a gun.

The regulations to implement this law, rather than the law itself, did impose new limits on one group: Jews.

On Nov. 11, 1938, the German minister of the interior issued "Regulations Against Jews Possession of Weapons." Not only were Jews forbidden to own guns and ammunition, they couldn’t own "truncheons or stabbing weapons."


The Jews were disarmed....


In 1929 private ownership of guns in Soviet Union was abolished


""Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." Our principle is that the Party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party."


Mao Zedong 1938

"NOW, THEREFORE, I, Ferdinand E. Marcos, Commander-in-Chief of all the Armed Forces of the Philippines, and pursuant to Proclamation No.1081 dated September 21, 1972, do hereby order that henceforth and until otherwise ordered by me or by my duly designated representative, no person shall keep, possess or carry outside of his residence any firearm unless such person is duly authorized to keep, possess or carry any such firearm and any person violating this order shall forthwith be arrested and taken into custody and held for the duration of the emergency unless ordered released by me or by my duly designated representative.

General Order N. 6 Ferdinand Marcos 1972

""The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing."


Adolf Hitler

...should I go on???

Finally, not directly related to gun control....

Daniel Ellsberg (the Pentagon Papers) On NSA Spying "‘We’re A Turnkey Away From A Police State"...all it takes is falling in the wrong hands...

Daniel Ellsberg On NSA Spying: 'We're A Turnkey Away From A Police State' | The Huffington Post
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2016, 03:29 PM
 
3,153 posts, read 2,069,563 times
Reputation: 1256
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan View Post
Aaah, that covers it nicely the logic he cannot be one because he doesn't need to be one. Perverts who are rich cannot be perverts because they don't need to be. Roger Ailes, Bill Cosby, Jeffery Epstein, Jared Fogle; is that you?

7 Things You Need To Know About Trump And Sex Slave Island | Daily Wire
Illogical rants again....what is new??

I never said they cannot be sexual predators....simply if they are serial woman chasers they do have their opportunities without assaulting anyone....I know that is hard to comprehend in your perfect politically correct vision of the world...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2016, 07:50 PM
 
3,153 posts, read 2,069,563 times
Reputation: 1256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natnasci View Post
What I'd like to know is this. Saturno said that sometimes he carries, and sometimes he doesn't. Why? What is happening on the day he decides it's best to have his gun with him?
Nothing is happening...depends on my clothing attire, social engagements or barely just feeling to doing it or not....it is my choice not a government choice...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2016, 08:05 PM
 
18,259 posts, read 10,360,166 times
Reputation: 13312
I'm going to choose to ignore all the bumph you've frothed and just deal with the one that is the continual theme of your stupidity.

This girl was attacked in her own home, not out in the street. As such she could have and would have been within the law in Canada to have had a home defence weapon/firearm.

In her home she quite likely would not have been carrying a firearm regardless of legality allowing such. How many of you stupid people carry your firearm while tossing a salad in your own kitchen? More to the freaking point how many of you would think that being a normal condition?

I guess you missed the part where she says she is glad there were no guns in the house?

My point is still, as it has always been that if you live in such a place you think it prudent; Canadians by comparison would think of that as a societal failure and would move heaven and earth before accepting that as a fait accompli.

Where are you coming from with the conflating everything I've clearly laid out regarding the "carrying of a weapon" as undesired by the bulk of Canadians to her being able to defend herself in her own home.

You now come up with this emotive "tell it to her" bullcrap implying a loftier moral imperative somewhere within that nonsense?

Illogical ranting again? You're a one trick pony Saturno with no grasp of reading comprehension. I've taken more time and effort to clarify my stance than necessary for your average two year old needing a "hold your hand to go pee pee" but you defy reason.

Only incredibly stupid people cannot understand the difference between a society that does not desire the conditions prevalent so as to justify acceptance of carrying of a weapon as prudent VERSUS one that not only does not find it abhorrent, but actually brags about the right to do so.

Only stupid people would refuse to accept the explanation of it being characteristic of a society having a higher degree of respect for the rule of law and order than that of another.

Only stupid people would propose that the one nation, regardless if not stipulated in a document whose preamble states "all men are created equal" written by slave owners, is less free due to not having the right to carry a firearm upon their very person written into their defining document, regardless if they are still allowed to own firearms.

Only stupid people would continue to argue that point when there has been no suggestion to the contrary by anyone.

Only stupid people would continue arguing by conflating the argument to include all firearm ownership when that has never been the contentious issue.

Carrying, carrying, carrying upon one's person...can I or anyone possibly make it any clearer to you?

You're different and we still understand.

Last edited by BruSan; 11-13-2016 at 08:41 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2016, 08:19 PM
 
18,259 posts, read 10,360,166 times
Reputation: 13312
Quote:
Originally Posted by saturno_v View Post
Illogical rants again....what is new??

.

I never said they cannot be sexual predators....simply if they are serial woman chasers they do have their opportunities without assaulting anyone....I know that is hard to comprehend in your perfect politically correct vision of the world...
“You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” – Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride.

Rant: to speak or declaim extravagantly or violently; talk in a wild or vehement fashion

Comprehension is not your strong suit. Groping someone without their consent is ASSAULT!

My politically correct version of the world includes; those who've admitted to choosing their victims according to their attractiveness, admitted to then groping them without permission implied or otherwise and then admitted to doing so repeatedly....... is a sexual predator.

Trump's words, no one else's.

The man's a cretin and you're enthralled....no surprise there; you're different, we understand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2016, 08:37 PM
 
3,153 posts, read 2,069,563 times
Reputation: 1256
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan View Post
“You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” – Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride.

Rant: to speak or declaim extravagantly or violently; talk in a wild or vehement fashion

Comprehension is not your strong suit. Groping someone without their consent is ASSAULT!

My politically correct version of the world includes; those who've admitted to choosing their victims according to their attractiveness, admitted to then groping them without permission implied or otherwise and then admitted to doing so repeatedly....... is a sexual predator.

Trump's words, no one else's.

The man's a cretin and you're enthralled....no surprise there; you're different, we understand.

Yes, your are rants...indeed...

Comprehension not my strong suit?? talking about The pot calling the kettle black...hilarious..


Go back and listen to that video again....there is nothing indicating in his words that the allegedly groped women were groped without consent.....he said "they let you do it if you are a celebrity"

I'm "enthralled" by Trump??!! I almost choked by laughing...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2016, 08:47 PM
 
18,259 posts, read 10,360,166 times
Reputation: 13312
Quote:
Originally Posted by saturno_v View Post
Yes, your are rants...indeed...

Comprehension not my strong suit?? talking about The pot calling the kettle black...hilarious..


Go back and listen to that video again....there is nothing indicating in his words that the allegedly groped women were groped without consent.....he said "they let you do it if you are a celebrity"

I'm "enthralled" by Trump??!! I almost choked by laughing...
What kind of idiot would assume consent because their target is a member of the entertainment community?

Gawd, you're not only different but a hopeless waste of time.

"Almost choked by laughing"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top